SANKARAN KANI Vs. KUNJURAMAN KANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A. S. 686 of 1961 is directed against the decree in o. S. 74 of 1956 of the Second Additional District Judge, Trivandrum , and is by the plaintiff. The suit was to set aside an order for the transfer of pattah of the properties of one kochan Kani, upon his death in the year 1124. On the motion of defendants 1 and 2 who claimed to be his son by the first wife and his second wife respectively, pattah was ordered to issue to the former, in opposition to the claim advanced by his brother, the plaintiff, according to whom, Kochan Kani was a marumakkathayee and his properties devolved on him. The first defendant contended that Kochan Kani was a makkathayee and that he is therefore entitled to succeed to his properties. The Additional District Judge accepted his contentions and dismissed the suit.

(2.) A. S. 469 of 1964 is directed against the decree in o. S. 78 of 1959 of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Trivandrum, in which the defendant therein, who is the first defendant in O. S. 74 of 1956, is the appellant. That suit was by the plaintiff in O. S. 74 of 1956 as the first plaintiff and by his alienees as plaintiffs 2 to 5, for a declaration of their title and possession in respect of the properties in schedules A to E of the plaint, which belonged to Kochan Kani and were alleged to have devolved on the 1st plaintiff, and parts of which, comprised in schedules B to E, were alienated by him in favour of plaintiffs 2 to 5. The main contention of the defendant was, that Kochan Kani was a makkathayee and not a marumakkathayee as alleged and that the alienations were not valid. The Subordinate Judge held, that Kochan Kani was a marumakkathayee and that his properties devolved on the first plaintiff and came into his possession and decreed the suit.

(3.) I am satisfied that the pleadings in O. S. 74 of 1956 & in O. S. 78 of 1959, are sufficient to raise pointedly the question posed above, that is, whether Kochan Kani was a follower of the marumakkathayam system or not. He was a member of a hill tribe called Kanikkars, who inhabit certain villages in Neyyattinkara and other Taluks. The evidence on the point consists of documents executed by Kochan Kani or taken by him, and of his depositions and affidavit, in addition to documents executed by other Kanikkars pointing to the system of inheritance by which they are governed. To mention the documents in which Kochan Kani took part in their chronological order, Ext. D18 of the year 1099 the earliest, is a lease deed executed by him, in which he described himself as the "ananthiravan" of Mathevan. Ext. P4 of the year 1100 is another lease deed of the same description which recited, that the property concerned was registered as 'kanipattu' in favour of his ancestor, that his karnavan had been in possession, and that after the latter's death, he came into possession. Ext. D22, a release deed taken by Kochan Kani in the year 1103, Ext. D27, a sale deed taken by him in the year 1106, and Ext. D26, another sale deed of the year 1125, all described him as Mathevan's "ananthiravan". Though in Ext. D27, the Executant Kochappi Kani described himself as the son of Malan Kani, in Ext. D26 it was recited, that the executants, who were also Kanikkars, obtained the property sold from their karnavars and grandkarnavars.